The Dual Filial Piety Model offers a universally applicable framework for understanding essential aspects of intergenerational relations across diverse cultural contexts. The current research aimed to examine two important issues concerning this model that have lacked investigation: the roles of parental socialization and social ecologies in the development of reciprocal and authoritarian filial piety attitudes. To this end, a two-wave short-term longitudinal survey study was conducted among 850 early adolescents residing in urban and rural China, who completed questionnaires twice, 6 (...) months apart, in the spring semester of grade 7 and the fall semester of grade 8. Multigroup path analyses revealed bidirectional associations over time between perceived parenting styles and adolescents’ filial piety attitudes, with both similarities and differences in these associations between urban and rural China. In both settings, perceived authoritative parenting predicted increased reciprocal filial piety 6 months later, whereas perceived authoritarian parenting predicted reduced reciprocal filial piety among urban adolescents over time. Moreover, in both settings, reciprocal filial piety predicted higher levels of perceived authoritative parenting and lower levels of perceived authoritarian parenting 6 months later, with the latter effect being stronger among urban adolescents. Adolescents’ perceived parenting styles did not predict their authoritarian filial piety over time; however, authoritarian filial piety predicted higher levels of perceived authoritative parenting 6 months later in both settings. The findings highlight the roles of transactional socialization processes between parents and youth as well as social ecologies in the development of filial piety, thus advancing the understanding of how the universal human motivations underlying filial piety may function developmentally across different socioeconomic and sociocultural settings. (shrink)

Physicians are shaped by sociological and philosophical factors that often differ from those of their patients. This is of particular concern in pluralistic societies when navigating ethical disagreements because physicians often misunderstand or even dismiss patient perspectives as being irrational. This paper examines these factors and why many physicians approach ethics as they do while elucidating various patient perspectives and demonstrating how they make sense when considered from a different cultural worldview. Many physicians are trained in contexts that are WEIRD: (...) Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic. These sociological characteristics tend to go hand in hand with the trio of individualism, secularism, and existentialism. These then shape an approach to ethics that focuses on the individual patient, makes no reference to the divine, and focuses on a patient’s personal desires. This contrasts significantly with many patients who are collectivistic or religious, and then make rational decisions based on other values. The social fact of pluralism implores physicians to temper confidence in their own cultures while considering others to promote mutual understanding and improved care. This paper concludes with a discussion of how bridges can be built across cultures without sliding into relativism, beginning with recognizing and communicating our shared moral intuitions. (shrink)